EDIT - I a talking about the SECOND Newcastle penalty incident. Newcastle had a SECOND penalty awarded today in their game vs West Ham. What I found fascinating is that the Newcastle player (Gordon) placed his foot in between the ball and Phillips whilst he (Phillips) was in the action of making a clearance. To me it was a ‘suicide’ attack which Phillips couldn’t avoid - he was in mid-kick. Penalty was given but I’m not sure it should have been. I’ve not seen that happen before. Anyone else see it? Edit - corrected the names of the players. Unbelievable game - but I’m not sure that penalty should have been awarded. Coufal was going for the ball - Gordon didn’t go for the ball - he put his foot in the way of the clearance - effectively going for the man. Poor decision IMHO - even had VAR.
Wait till you see how close the whole of the ball crossed the line for a Spurs no goal. It could not been more than the paint on the ball to stop the whole of the ball that crossing the line.
Phillips makes contact with his opponent, not the ball. Phillips kicks his opponents standing leg. It doesn't matter that he didn't realise he was there, he kicks his opponents leg, and its unfortunate, but its a foul.
Imagine it’s at the other end of the pitch Cliftonville? Phillips is in Newcastle’s box, about to shoot for goal and Gordon approaches from behind and puts his foot in the way - without touching (or even seeming to attempt to get) the ball exactly what happened but imagine it up the other end of the pitch with Phillips the attacker and Gordon the defender. I bet that would have been a penalty to Phillips - rather than a free kick to Gordon!!
There always has been, and always will be a big club bias. Take yesterday for example, if the 3 possible penalties had been for them rather than us, I’m convinced at least one would have been given .
This still photo illustrates my point precisely. You can see that Gordon has stomped his foot between Phillips’s standing foot and his kicking foot. This photo (to me) shows Phillips in front of Gordon and in control of the ball which he is in the process of clearing. Gordon sticks his leg over the ball (no attempt to play it) BEHIND Phillips’s standing foot and of course it was bound to be kicked. It was unavoidable. The referee applied the law ‘thou shall not kick your opponent’ and awarded the penalty. Maybe the rules gave him no choice. It didn’t feel ‘right’ to me. To me (as I posted on OTIB) it seemed like the football equivalent to a pedestrian deliberately throwing themself in front of a motor vehicle with the intention of collecting the insurance or compensation payout. It worked in this case and I wonder how many ‘copycat’ incidents we will see as a result until the rules are amended to deal with it.
The photo illustrates - The West Ham player is kicking the opponent versus the ball. That is the offence and the foul.
I’m not disagreeing with you on this Clifton - that’s why the penalty was awarded. Gordon was kicked by Phillips - undeniable - and no amount of debate on here will change that. My point is was it FAIR, considering that Gordon put his foot where he knew it would be kicked in order to exploit the rules? I would argue that yes, the referee called it correctly because he’s bound by the rules of the game, but it doesn’t make it RIGHT. Does that mean that you can aim to put your foot in between the opponent’s foot and the ball every time he’s poised to either shoot or make a clearance in order to draw a foul? What about a GK taking a kick? If you manage to run up and stick your foot there as he is about to strike the ball you will get a foul as he inevitably kicks you. I can see a new focus on the training ground coming on…!!!!!
Yes it was fair. Gordon has not exploited rules. Phillips cannot kick the opposing player. A foul is a foul. It is an infringement of the laws of the game. What about a GK taking a kick? The laws of football don't allow any challenge on a keeper if the ball is being released from the hands. Fair again.
